Suppr超能文献

肿瘤学家认为他们说了什么和患者认为他们听到了什么:I 期临床试验讨论分析。

What oncologists believe they said and what patients believe they heard: an analysis of phase I trial discussions.

机构信息

Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, United Kingdom BN9 1QG.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2011 Jan 1;29(1):61-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.30.0814. Epub 2010 Nov 22.

Abstract

UNLABELLED

PURPOSE; Evaluation of the communication and informed consent process in phase I clinical trial interviews to provide authentic, practice-based content for inclusion in a communication skills training intervention for health care professionals.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventeen oncologists and 52 patients from five United Kingdom cancer centers consented to recording of phase I trial discussions. Following each consultation, clinicians completed questionnaires indicating areas they felt they had discussed, and researchers conducted semistructured interviews with patients examining their recall and understanding. Patients and oncologists also completed the Life Orientation Test-Revised questionnaire, measuring predisposition toward optimism. Independent researchers coded the consultations identifying discussion of key information areas and how well this was done. Observed levels of agreement were analyzed for each consultation between oncologist-coder, oncologist-patient, and patient-coder pairs.

RESULTS

In several key areas, information was either missing or had been explained but was interpreted incorrectly by patients. Discussion of prognosis was a frequent omission, with patients and coders significantly more likely to agree that oncologists had not discussed it (odds, 4.8; P < .001). In contrast, coders and oncologists were more likely to agree that alternate care plans to phase I trial entry had been explained (odds, 2.5; P = .023).

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that fundamental components of communication and information sharing about phase I trial participation are often missing from interviews. Important omissions included discussion of prognosis and ensuring patient understanding about supportive care. These findings will inform educational initiatives to assist communication about phase I trials.

摘要

目的

评估 I 期临床试验访谈中的沟通和知情同意过程,为医疗保健专业人员的沟通技巧培训干预措施提供真实、基于实践的内容。

患者和方法

来自英国五家癌症中心的 17 名肿瘤学家和 52 名患者同意记录 I 期试验讨论。每次咨询后,临床医生填写问卷,指出他们认为讨论过的领域,研究人员对患者进行半结构化访谈,检查他们的回忆和理解。患者和肿瘤学家还完成了生活取向测试修订版问卷,衡量对乐观的倾向。独立研究人员对咨询进行编码,确定讨论的关键信息领域以及完成情况。分析每次咨询中肿瘤学家-编码员、肿瘤学家-患者和患者-编码员对的观察一致性。

结果

在几个关键领域,信息要么缺失,要么已经解释过,但被患者误解。预后讨论经常被遗漏,患者和编码员更有可能同意肿瘤学家没有讨论过(比值比,4.8;P <.001)。相比之下,编码员和肿瘤学家更有可能同意已经解释了替代 I 期试验进入的治疗计划(比值比,2.5;P =.023)。

结论

这些数据表明,关于 I 期试验参与的沟通和信息共享的基本要素经常在访谈中缺失。重要的遗漏包括讨论预后和确保患者对支持性护理的理解。这些发现将为协助 I 期试验沟通的教育计划提供信息。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验